« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Tech at Night: The left’s war on spectrum.

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  May 19th, 2012 at 03:02 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Tech at Night

The FCC and the radicals are at war with the secondary spectrum market. Gigi Sohn even tried to make the point at the Less Government debate that license holders don’t own spectrum. That’s true. They own the licenses. That’s where property rights come in.

So it’s disappointing to see Democrats still piling on against Verizon even as the push begins to go after Dish. As an aside, do Koch-funded groups ever get called “public interest groups” the way Soros-funded groups do?

Marco Rubio does not want the UN regulating the Internet. Good on him.

Part of a case for strong copyright. I’m not sure I agree with it, as I disagree with much of the copyright extension we’ve seen from the 80s on, but I see no harm in linking to it for the curious. It at least tries to go back to the Constitution, which is better than what many do.

Slow news day. Have a nice weekend.

Tags: , , , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • kzimm

    I must say, I don’t think I have heard any US politician, industry expert, etc. speak FOR UN regulation of the Internet. Not sure how much credit I’d give to Rubio for taking the same side as everyone else., as it was stated, the White House, State Department, Department of Commerce, and FCC already agree that such a move would be “devastating.” There is no chance the US would support such a measure.

    As far as spectrum, what is the issue with questioning the use of spectrum by companies that have already been given effective physical last-mile monopolies and already posses the largest spectrum licenses, in AT&T and Verizon? For a free market economy to function, you need competition.

  • checkmate2012

    watch what the Left does, not what they say. Later…

  • kzimm

    but what are you talking about? The White House has been clear with their own stance on the issue: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/05/02/ensuring-open-internet and it isn’t just words, as under Obama ICANN/IANA has been taken under further control of the US government and US based organizations, ignoring the complaints of foreign companies/countries.

    This is one issue both the right and the left have been very clear on and agree on for a LONG time, both sides have worked to keep foreign control away from the Internet. Do you have any demonstration of that not being the truth?

    You may not agree with Obama much, but this is one area where most everyone seems to agree, do not cede control of the Internet to foreigners.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Moe took care of that.

  • synergist777

    I’ve said this often in other places, but it appears that very few people who talk about the UN (particularly those who want to give more power to it) have actually bothered to read the UN charter (which is really not all that long; I’ve seen longer blog entries). The UN was not designed to be a world government, and is a ridiculous design for one (it’s even a ridiculous design for what it is; it is based on geopolitical realities from 70 years ago that have changed radically; even many of its more intelligent proponents agree that it desperately needs reformation). Much of its founding philosophy has been lost rules which are no longer valid (for example, the idea of the Security Council, that the UN can’t send in troops without the consent of those countries who would be providing most of them).

    To anybody who wants the power of the UN to be expanded, particularly trying to make it an international governing body, they should be told that the UN was designed as a NEGOTIATING body, not a governing one, and its power is entirely by treaty,l and to READ THE CHARTER.

  • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

    Democrats ignore the Constitution. The only thing that matters is the accumulation of power, which should be the antithesis of a “negotiating” body.

    Oh, and on June 25, 1950 it ceased being a “negotiating body”.